PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

A Pons-Guiraud

Publications and source records attributed to A Pons-Guiraud.

8 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2005

[Contact allergy to antiseptics: 75 cases analyzed by the dermato-allergovigilance network (Revidal)].

AIM: To determine the clinical features of contact dermatitis caused by antiseptics and to ascertain whether the substance responsible is the antiseptic itself or the excipients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective study based on analysis of all cases reported over a 2-year period to the Dermato-Allergology Vigilance network known as Revidal. Each dossier contained details of the clinical characteristics of lesions, the incriminated antiseptic, the mode of exposure and the results of patch tests done with the antiseptic in question. RESULTS: 75 patients (mean age: 44 years) were sensitized to chlorhexidine (14 cases), hexamidine (20 cases), povidone iodine (14 cases), mercuric antiseptics (3 cases), triclocarban (Septivon, 17 cases), hexamidine-chlorhexidine-chlorocresol (Cytéal, 4 cases), or chlorhexidine surfactant (Hibiscrub), cetrimide or chlorhexidine digluconate (Diaseptyl) (1 case each). Exposure was therapy-related (68 cases), work-related (6 cases; 5 in health workers and 1 in a cattle farmer due to povidone-iodine) or related to cosmetics (1 case, hexamidine). The clinical features consisted mainly of localized contact dermatitis, although generalized eczema occurred in 9 cases due to hexamidine contact. Sensitization was due to the antiseptic itself (53 cases) or to the excipients alone (22 cases), particularly in the 17 cases caused by Septivon. In 27/75 cases (35%), patients exhibited polysensitization to antiseptics belonging to different chemical classes or to other topical drugs. CONCLUSION: Sensitization to antiseptics is probably not rare, with various sources of exposure being present in everyday life. Patch tests are essential for diagnosis in order to distinguish between antiseptic-related and excipient-related sensitization and to screen for polysensitization to topical drugs.

Administration, Topical↗
PubMed2004

[Slowly absorbable and non absorbable injectable products].

Products which are non absorbable or slowly absorbable make the correction of facial wasting of any origin possible. These highly efficient products are unfortunately sometimes responsible for complications or even undesirable after effects. In order to avoid this the following are necessary: clinical and histological analysis of facias granulomas, a proposal for guidelines for their use which would predict in situ tolerance.

Biocompatible Materials↗
PubMed2004

Sensitive skin: a complex and multifactorial syndrome.

Many people complain of discomfort after application of commonly used skin care products, particularly to the face. This hyperreactivity of the skin is a non-immunologically mediated skin inflammation. It seems to be the result of an intolerance of the skin to various stimuli that are normally well tolerated. It is difficult to assess the prevalence of 'sensitive skin' and sensitive skin-related cosmetic intolerance because of the many possible exogenous and endogenous factors that trigger or aggravate this multifactorial syndrome. A thorough history is essential. Sometimes patch testing is needed both to standard allergens and also to all the patients' cosmetics and skin care products. All cosmetics should be stopped and then reintroduced one by one, at intervals of one to two weeks. The number, type and frequency of the application of skin care products used in the final programme should remain limited. Some patients benefit from psychological or even psychiatric help. Management is usually difficult and all therapeutic measures should be undertaken with patience and tenacity.

Journal Article↗
PubMed2000

Tolerance profile of a sterile moisturizer and moisturizing cleanser in irritated and sensitive skin.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluates the tolerance of preservative free sterile cleanser and sterile moisturizer in irritated and sensitive face skin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An exploratory, open-label study using the cleanser and the moisturizer in combination was performed with 98 patients with a documented history of allergic contact dermatitis. The 2 products could each be used once or twice daily for 28 days. The assessment parameters at baseline and end of treatment (day 28) included the intensity of erythema, dryness/scaling by the investigator and subjective signs (burning, pruritus and stinging), according to a defined 4-point scale (absent to severe). In addition, a global assessment of the change from baseline and the overall tolerance of the products were performed by the investigator at the end of treatment. RESULTS: Ninety-four patients were included for the efficacy analysis and 96 patients for the safety analysis. At baseline, a majority of patients expressed some degree of erythema (63%), and dryness/scaling (56%). Fewer patients experienced subjective signs at baseline (44%). At the end of treatment, the results showed a statistically significant improvement of all the objective signs of irritated skin (P = .0001, Mac Nemar test), as well as the subjective signs of sensitive skin (P < 0.02). This was confirmed by the overall investigator assessment, showing an excellent or good response in 90% of the patients. In the safety analysis, 1 patient developed contact allergy to 1 ingredient of the test products (carbomer), and 3 patients exacerbated their dermatitis. CONCLUSION: Taken together, these results suggest that adequately formulated cosmetics might reduce both irritated and sensitive skin, with clinical improvement of dryness, erythema and stinging.

Adult↗